“hmm, how can we, the capitalist victors of WW2, ensure we keep the rising tides of communism at bay in Europe? Oh you’re telling me there’s a whole country full of fascists eager to redeem themselves in our eyes? How convenient…”
Of course, Wikipedia should only be blindly trusted to the same extent as memes shared by random people. Make sure to check the references, sources, and external links.
Can I recommend you a browser extension called Media Bias Fact Check? You can get it on Firefox and Chrome and probably other Chromium browsers too. On Chrome it’s a featured extension while on Firefox it hasn’t been audited by Mozilla’s security team yet.
In any case, with MBFC installed, when you go to a website that it’s rated, it will display a little icon in your toolbar showing that publication’s bias or sometimes other info (such as “pro-science”, “satire”, “pseudoscience & conspiracy”). CounterPunch is rated as having a “left” bias. So evidently, CounterPunch is a major enough publication to be rated by MBFC, and not just some “random blog”. MBFC provides this detailed report.
TL;DR: CounterPunch is a highly credible source, though it is also controversial for several reasons. CounterPunch has never failed a fact check, but has sometimes failed to provide hyperlinked sources and indicate opinion, and has a clear left-wing bias in story choice and language use. It is a 501c3 non-profit which generates revenue through book sales, donations, grants, and advertising.
When you encounter an unfamiliar news source online, it can also be a good idea to see if it’s notable enough to have a Wikipedia article. The Wikipedia article might provide more useful information about the publication as well.
CounterPunch indeed is notable enough to have an English-language Wikipedia article. This article is thoroughly sourced, frequently edited, and has existed since December 21st, 2003 — making “CounterPunch” one of the first 500,000 articles to be published on Wikipedia, when Wikipedia was just under three years old… I feel like that says something about how notable CounterPunch is.
J’en n’ai rien à branler d’argumenter avec des gens qui comparent l’Ukraine à des nazis mais qui n’ont aucun problème avec ce que fait le russie la bas
Mdr pour ma vie ? Au pire je ferme l’application. J’ai ma conscience pour moi donc je le vis bien, c’est pas 10 commentaires de mecs m’expliquant que tuer et violer des civils ukrainiens c’est ok temps qu’on dit qu’ils sont nazi qui vont m’atteindre.
Poetic, considering that both Libya and Serbia were coincidentally under Axis occupation. (Libya in particular was a Fascist colony for nearly two decades.)
I’m going to assume it’s that they’re comfortable, young, American and middle class. Too young to have loved though the cold war and not knowing anyone from ex-Soviet states to inform them what it was actually like, so use being anti-NATO as counter-culture as most things youth used to fight for to achieve that is now mainstream.
What’s the fuck is wrong with you ?
Gabriel Rockhill: The U.S. Did Not Defeat Fascism in WWII, It Discretely Internationalized It
Oh great a random blog on the internet say it so it must be true
“hmm, how can we, the capitalist victors of WW2, ensure we keep the rising tides of communism at bay in Europe? Oh you’re telling me there’s a whole country full of fascists eager to redeem themselves in our eyes? How convenient…”
Adolf Heusinger on EN Wikipedia
Hans Speidel on EN Wikipedia
Johannes Steinhoff on EN Wikipedia
Johann von Kielmansegg on EN Wikipedia
Ernst Ferber on DE Wikipedia
Karl Schnell on DE Wikipedia
Franz-Joseph Schulze on EN Wikipedia
Ferdinand Maria von Senger und Etterlin on EN Wikipedia
Of course, Wikipedia should only be blindly trusted to the same extent as memes shared by random people. Make sure to check the references, sources, and external links.
Where did you get this image? TinEye only found this version: https://slovanskenoviny.sk/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/image-52.jpeg
I had it saved so I don’t remember where, but Googles reverse image search yields more matches than tineye
CounterPunch has existed since before blogging was invented.
You should try reading instead of knee-jerk screeching. I’ve heard it’s good.
deleted by creator
From wiki:
I’m pretty sure this random blog is older and more well-known than you.
Can I recommend you a browser extension called Media Bias Fact Check? You can get it on Firefox and Chrome and probably other Chromium browsers too. On Chrome it’s a featured extension while on Firefox it hasn’t been audited by Mozilla’s security team yet.
In any case, with MBFC installed, when you go to a website that it’s rated, it will display a little icon in your toolbar showing that publication’s bias or sometimes other info (such as “pro-science”, “satire”, “pseudoscience & conspiracy”). CounterPunch is rated as having a “left” bias. So evidently, CounterPunch is a major enough publication to be rated by MBFC, and not just some “random blog”. MBFC provides this detailed report.
TL;DR: CounterPunch is a highly credible source, though it is also controversial for several reasons. CounterPunch has never failed a fact check, but has sometimes failed to provide hyperlinked sources and indicate opinion, and has a clear left-wing bias in story choice and language use. It is a 501c3 non-profit which generates revenue through book sales, donations, grants, and advertising.
When you encounter an unfamiliar news source online, it can also be a good idea to see if it’s notable enough to have a Wikipedia article. The Wikipedia article might provide more useful information about the publication as well.
CounterPunch indeed is notable enough to have an English-language Wikipedia article. This article is thoroughly sourced, frequently edited, and has existed since December 21st, 2003 — making “CounterPunch” one of the first 500,000 articles to be published on Wikipedia, when Wikipedia was just under three years old… I feel like that says something about how notable CounterPunch is.
A ta place je lirais ce qu’on t’a posté en réponse, camarade; qui sais, tu pourrais même apprendre des choses.
Ou a minima, essaye au moins d’argumenter un peu tes réponses.
J’en n’ai rien à branler d’argumenter avec des gens qui comparent l’Ukraine à des nazis mais qui n’ont aucun problème avec ce que fait le russie la bas
vazy frère bas-toi pour ta vie dans les commentaires je te regarde
Mdr pour ma vie ? Au pire je ferme l’application. J’ai ma conscience pour moi donc je le vis bien, c’est pas 10 commentaires de mecs m’expliquant que tuer et violer des civils ukrainiens c’est ok temps qu’on dit qu’ils sont nazi qui vont m’atteindre.
grosse “j’ai inventé un gars, puis je me suis mis en colère contre ce gars” énergie
Énorme colère de ma part la, en train de casser des écrans dans l’open space
qui exactement ici dit que tuer et violer des civils Ukrainiens c’est ok ?
deleted by creator
maybe if you read it you might learn something
What the fuck is wrong with libs defending Nazi scum?!?
tell me your thoughts on what nato did to libya
Poetic, considering that both Libya and Serbia were coincidentally under Axis occupation. (Libya in particular was a Fascist colony for nearly two decades.)
I’m going to assume it’s that they’re comfortable, young, American and middle class. Too young to have loved though the cold war and not knowing anyone from ex-Soviet states to inform them what it was actually like, so use being anti-NATO as counter-culture as most things youth used to fight for to achieve that is now mainstream.